 Good afternoon, everybody, and welcome to this press conference. The DGA will sign a few words. Some of them have a question. Good afternoon, everybody. Thank you very much. I landed 20 minutes ago, literally. And I'm very happy to be back and to see you all. Just to give you a bit of context before you ask questions that you may have. As you know, I went to Ukraine and I visited the South nuclear power plant. I had a number of meetings with the Minister of Energy of Ukraine with the head of the nuclear company, and of course with the Ukrainian regulator there and with some technical people from the station. This meeting was very important not only to analyze the situation over there, but in a wider sense to discuss the next steps that we are planning to take, and the next measures that we are going to be proposing to continue our work on safety and security there. Having completed that part of the trip, I moved on to the Russian Federation to Kaliningrad, where I met with the Director General of the Rosatom Corporation, representatives of the Russian Ministry for Affairs and also the Russian regulator. And there we also discussed some of these issues from, of course, their perspective. The work with this, the work started, and we are going to be continuing in the next few days. So this is the context, and having said that, I am at your disposal. Any questions that you may have? Hi, DG, Francois Murphy from Reuters. Hello. I feel like everything is a little confusing at the moment, but first we could straighten a few things out. First of all, on the one hand there is this idea of the framework agreement, and then on the other there is the assistance that you are providing. Initially it sounded like you wanted a framework agreement before you could provide assistance, but then you announced that you were starting some assistance the moment you arrived in Ukraine. It sounds like talks on the framework agreement are continuing, so could you tell us what aid do you intend to provide overall? Yes. How much of that has already been provided? And where are you on the framework agreements? Well, thank you very much. Very pertinent question. I would kindly ask you to bear with us if in the middle of military conflict we cannot be as orderly and systematic as would be desirable in peace time. So not always everything goes as you plan, because there is this situation. But let me say initially, yes, there was this idea of having an agreed framework that would be accepted by all, and this was part of a number of consultations that I had as in any diplomatic process where different options were considered. Initially there was an idea to have something trilateral then to have it codified separately, but the reality is that there were a number of observations on the impact of this kind of approach on other political matters. And I took the decision that what's important here is to work on the nuclear safety and the security of the plants. I have said from day one that there is a real risk and that my intention was not to engage in a process of negotiating drafts after drafts after drafts of a paper. It doesn't make any sense in the circumstances. So I do have, if you want, an agreed framework. I do have it. But the difference is that we have agreed separately with Russia and with Ukraine on what we are going to do, and this does not require to agree on the wording of a specific document. That doesn't mean that we are acting out of thin air. We have a very detailed list of activities that have been agreed with Ukraine on the basis of a document of purely technical nature, and I can describe that to you if you are interested. The assistance has started, actually, because we, I mean, in my trip I took with me some radiation monitoring equipment, portable and of a different nature, which is needed in different locations there. So one can say that we have started that. In terms of the activities and the assistance that we are going to be providing, it has many aspects. There is one that has to do with advice and support, which is being given remotely by our teams from Vienna. Some of this has started, but we still need to discuss with them some specific issues that were necessary. So this is one thing. The second is in the area of delivery of equipment. Delivery of equipment, as I told you, has also started, but they do have needs. We also want to assess from our own perspective. We also have a very important number of countries, member states that are offering us assistance, but of course this needs some order. We have to reconcile what our Ukrainian colleagues need with what is available and have us as a bridge and as a technical advisor to do that. There is another area, which is of course very, very important, which has to do with the physical presence of IAEA experts and inspection safeguards on site at different places. We also discussed about this. We are not of course planning to have large numbers of people out there. We are discussing what kind of specialties, what kinds of expertise may be needed, and this of course is different if you are talking about Chernobyl, or if you are talking about Melnitsky, or if you are talking about Rivne or South. It depends on each one of those. So we have agreed about that as well. There are a number of logistical considerations. As you can imagine my own trip had lots of them because of the reality on the ground. With an ongoing, I must say, military conflict and I want to remind you that I went to the nuclear power plant which is closest to the war zone. So that is another thing. And finally, and I believe quite importantly, we agreed to have a rapid assistance mechanism which means that in case, and hopefully this won't be happening, in case there was a situation, an emergency that may be taking place, we are setting up a mechanism whereby we could be sending a team to assess and to assist almost immediately. So as you can see, there is a lot of, I would say, different groups of activities that we are undertaking under each one of these headings that I'm giving you, you can decline them into a good number of more specific tasks that are going to be undertaken. So I hope this long answer provides some clarity in what we have been doing. Perhaps you could just give us a vague idea of how far along you are in, because you've mentioned before that you have very specific plans for what you want to do there. These are the plans. I understand. But so how far along are we now? The plans are there and we are starting next week. But you said when you arrived there that you were starting then. So how far along are we in deploying all this assistance? What we did was deliver some equipment. This is a start. But we have a structured set of activities that are going to start us off next week. Robert Otti, the German Price Agency. Thanks for this explanation. I still have some follow-up questions or things I don't really understand. First of all, what kinds of parts are you supplying? And second of all, what kind of advice or what is the purpose of the missions that you're planning to send? Because I assume that Ukraine has a very high level of nuclear expertise. So why do they need the IAEA at this point? And is it also the case that a kind of a continuous presence, even if it's a small presence, of IAEA experts on the ground because of your international nature of the IAEA provides some kind of symbolic protection? No, well, yeah. This needs to be clarified. First of all, on your point about them having lots of expertise and thereby, if I infer correctly, not needing the IAEA, well, that could be applied to the rest of 173 member states and the IAEA perhaps could not even be necessary. We are providing consultancy and advisory service to dozens of countries around the world. And the fact that you have the expertise does not mean that you have a problem. You want to check against the standards. You want to check good practices around the world. You want to check if something has been done before. This kind of activity is normal in the life of the IAEA. We are in a constant interaction with the technical experts of every member state, let alone Ukraine in a military conflict. So it is absolutely needed. I would also like to remind you humbly that what's happening there has never happened before. So many things that may be disconnected or out of service because of a number of reasons, interruption of power or physical damage, maybe have never happened before. And we can provide them with advice, compare, it's not that they need us to do their job. They do know how to do their job, but this doesn't mean that there is not a lot of international assistance and cooperation ongoing. In this case, in particular. So this is very, very important. In the case of the physical presence, the physical presence has a number of dimensions, Albert, I would say. In the first place, it is about doing that job faster because you are there and our people can interact from there, can interact with the technical teams over here. And that makes the whole process far more efficient. So this is one dimension. Another dimension which is very, very important is the dimension of the briefings and information. You may have seen from the month, more or less, that we have had since this situation started that on occasion it has been a bit laborious for us to establish facts by having people there. This process also goes much faster. And if we have a problem in one area, then our people there can consult with the people at the plant and make it much, much faster. So it is in this sense that the presence of the IAEA experts is on site, it is important. So I hope this more or less clarifies these two points that you raised. And one other point, when it comes to safeguards, it is very important to be reminded that because there is this conflict, and again this is one of the very unprecedented features of this situation, we have these plants, many of them, running. And the nuclear material is there. And it needs to be verified. And there are activities guided or imposed by the operational needs of these facilities that must be verified. And in some cases, as it was the case for Chernobyl, remote monitoring capabilities have been interrupted. And as you know, because you are experts and you have been following other safeguards and non-proliferation cases that we have, some things can only be done by our experts. And there are international actors, including those who are hosting and having their facilities, cannot tamper with our equipment. So there is this also, this non-proliferation dimension, which is not frequently mentioned, perhaps logically, but it is nonetheless very important for us. So as you can see, there are many, many reasons why our presence there is so important. My question about the Chernobyl power plant, as you shared yesterday, your statement, and Ukraine authorities share also this information, the Russian forces left this power plant. What is the last situation there? First question. Second question. These steps by the Russian authorities was a little bit, in my eyes, was a little bit unexpected. It is about, how can I say that, you spoke with both sides, and it was on the table this issue. Did you speak with the Russian authorities about this? And how can we see these steps? It could be a positive sign to the other power plants, for instance, the Zoborisi, I don't know the name. So we have a positive sign that the Russian forces left also this power plant. Thank you. For those who are not, thank you for the question. For those who are not in the conduction of a war, any step may be unexpected. We do not know what the next step will be. What we know is what we want to see, as far as the nuclear power facilities in Ukraine is concerned. And this is undoubtedly a step in the right direction. We have been saying that the plant needed to be operated by its own natural operators, which was the case, that it had to have physical integrity protected, that the people there had to work under normal circumstances, which were not, of course, present, where you had foreign troops controlling and checking, etc. Perhaps you remember the issue of the shifts of the personnel, which were not being done. So it is obvious that we were raising this issue from day one, of the occupation of this plant, which did not coincide with the operation, with the start of the military actions there. So we see this, of course, as a step in the right direction. We are going to be there very, very soon, because there is, in Chernobyl, there is a lot of work to be done. And so we hope to be able to start this technical work in these areas that I was addressing in the previous questions. Hello, Diji. Welcome back. Thank you. I have a couple of questions. Just for the readers to understand, when you talk about the equipment, are we talking about, like, a more advanced diesel generator or the fuel itself, or what are you, apart from the portable radio geiger counter, what else can you say that you're providing? That's question number one. Question number two is that it seems like you're going to have to do the whole counting of the nuclear material in Chernobyl, because the data is not there. So you just want to go there and make sure that everything is as it is as before. Yes. And how long would that take, and how many manpower do you need? That's question number two. And are you going to, do you have a plan to strengthen the monitoring system, apart from what you have now? Yes. Number three is you are putting a lot of people in Chernobyl now. But did you get the sort of clear assurance from the Russian side, although that the whole framework is not agreed, but may we assume that they said that it's okay for you guys to go in? Thank you. Very good. Lots of important aspects there. In terms of the equipment, it does include what you mentioned. It may be including other bigger parts, but I would like to be prudent at the moment because we have to reconcile the list that our Ukrainian counterparts have given us with what we have, and we are in discussion. So it would not be correct for me to say exactly what we are planning to provide until we have an agreement with them. They are the interested party, if you want. They are sharing with us lists which are quite detailed and go beyond personal radiation monitoring equipment, I cannot show you, but we have to agree with them before this can be... There's nothing, I would say, mysterious about it. It's normal safety equipment, but we need to agree with them. In terms of the nuclear material, yes, we are going to... We can do that relatively quickly. We do not feel... We have a clear idea of what is there. As you know, we spent a few ponds and in other places at Chernobyl, so it's something that can be done. It has to be done rather quickly. Remember, when I... Give me the tool. When I came back from Antalya, I showed you something like this, and as you can see, this is all Chernobyl. So we have been losing monitoring assessment quite consistently, and this is what we need to restore. It doesn't mean that we are not registering things, we have to reconnect some things, and it can be done quite quickly. I don't have a problem about that but, of course, it needs to be done, and the sooner the better. Then your other question is a bit more difficult to answer because what you are asking me is whether we have full assurances that everything is going to be fine. We are going to get as good as an assurance as we can because, as I said, I would not put my stuff in harm's way. But we need to recognize that there is an armed conflict and there is shelling. So we need to have secure routes, we need to have protection, we need to have zones that are de-conflicted to move through. So we are very serious about this. Of course, we have our own security capabilities. We are in contact with the Ukrainian authorities which have been supporting, for example, my trip now. And, of course, we are talking to the Russian side, we are talking to U.N. security. I benefited and I take advantage of the occasion to thank again the Secretary-General who gave me his full support of the United Nations, I mean, who gave me his full support and provided some armored vehicles for us to move around. So all these things can be done, but you need to take lots of precautions and we are going to be doing that. Yes. Hello, D.G. Hello. This is Jordi from Agency AFF. Thank you very much for doing this and welcome back. Thank you. I want to come back to Chernobyl. You met the Russian authorities today. Did they tell you why they left Chernobyl? Is there a technical nuclear aspect? Or is it just a military security reason you might probably not have spoken about it? And do you and your experts believe that you can in the next few days confirm or not confirm if hundreds of Russian soldiers have been contaminated around Chernobyl? Is there... What's your analysis of how quickly you can confirm that? Thank you very much. Yeah. On why they left, well, they didn't discuss that with me. I think this is a decision by military authorities and it was not on the table. It's not the kind of thing that we were discussing. On the issue of radiation, we are already in consultation with the Ukrainian side and also we offered the Russian colleagues if there is any information that they want to share with us. As you know, and this has been under the general consideration for some weeks now, the general radiation situation around the plant is quite normal. There was a relatively higher level of localized radiation because of the movement of heavy vehicles at the time of the occupation of the plant and apparently this might have been the case again in the way out. So we heard about the possibility of some personnel being contaminated but we don't have any confirmation about that and we have a lot of expertise in-house to help if that was required from us. None of these reports have been confirmed. Hello, DG. Just a little bit of the care from Ajans François. Thank you very much for doing this so quickly. A few questions, if I may. Can you confirm the equipment and the personnel? Are you planning to send those to every nuclear facility in Ukraine, including Chernobyl? Secondly, are you disappointed by the fact that this broader framework seemingly isn't going to be happening? What would you characterize as the main obstacles to that? And lastly, I wondered if you might give us just a general impression of how you found the situation on the ground in Ukraine in terms of your colleagues from the Ukrainian regulator, the people who are at the power plants there. Is this an extremely difficult situation for them? How are they bearing up? How is life there for them right now? Okay, thank you for the question. Regarding the equipment, yes, I do hope to be able to deliver the equipment at every place where it's needed. Given the circumstances of different facilities, this may require different approaches. In the case of Chernobyl, it's one thing. In the case of the other power plants, there is the distance and there is the military situation. One of the plants remains under the control of the Russian forces. So that will undoubtedly require a different approach, but nothing makes me think that there would be an impossibility to do that. If I am disappointed about the agreed framework, as I said, no, because first of all, we have an agreement. We do have a framework. We do not have that element. But let me tell you, a good diplomat has a good toolbox. And when one tool doesn't work, you take another until you get what you want. So I'm not enamored with anything. The important thing is that the tool that you take, that's the job. And what we have now is doing the job. And then, of course, the human aspects are very important. You may have seen me talking to the staff. I really wanted to do this to express my admiration to them, the recognition that we all feel for the situation they are going through right now. But I can say I saw them very determined. I saw them working well. I saw them also comforted to see that the IAEA is there, side by side, offering assistance, being present. So my impression, of course, within the due respect that we must have for an ongoing conflict that is bringing a lot of suffering, I came back with a positive feeling in the middle of this tragedy, which is always war. Very quickly. When it comes to personnel, that's also every site, if needed. Sorry? When it comes to personnel, you could send that also to every site. You could send them to every site if necessary. I don't really understand. Every site? You mentioned equipment in terms of agency personnel. Sorry, I didn't get the idea very clearly. This is something that we are going to be deciding with the Ukrainian authorities. We have our ideas, we shared with them ideas and a chronogram, but they have to look at it and tell us what they want and in the order that they wanted. What do you mean things that have gone? We don't have information about nuclear material having disappeared from... No, no. But it's a relevant thing, and I think it's relevant in the context of my previous comments about the safeguards activities that we need to perform. We need to continue performing all our activities so that we can give the credible assurances that that is going to be the case. So that is one thing. Regarding the nuclear power plants and they being neutral, etc., it's not something that is for the IEA to discuss the territorial arrangements. What we have said is, of course, that they have to be... Their physical integrity needs to be protected at all times and that any attack or any physical action against a nuclear facility is, of course, unacceptable. And I think this is something that everybody agrees on and I hope that it is the case. And if it doesn't happen, the IEA will be saying that. Regarding the staff, I haven't heard anybody saying that they want to leave the stations or that they are uncomfortable working there. So if you bear with me, I have to close a very important conference that has been ongoing in my absence. So I want at least to show respect for those who were there at the conference and close it. I thank you for continuing following this issue. As I said in the beginning, I think that we are going to be moving to Chernobyl very, very soon and we are going to be informing you about that. I wish you all a nice evening and a good weekend. Thank you very much.